Core i5-13600K vs EPYC 9575F

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13600K

14 Cores20 Thrd125 WWMax: 5.1 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9575F

64 Cores128 Thrd400 WWMax: 5 GHz2024

Popular choices:

••••••i5-13600K•••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13600K

14 / 20

37,655

0.0%

147,718

+292.3%

Ryzen 9 7900X3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-13600K

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $11,462 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Delivers 813.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 400W, a 275W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9575F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 147,718).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9575F, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.7% higher average FPS across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.5 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌220% higher power demand at 400W vs 125W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-13600K

2022

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $11,462 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Delivers 813.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 400W, a 275W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9575F needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.7% higher average FPS across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 33 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 147,718).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9575F, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.5 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌220% higher power demand at 400W vs 125W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9575F better than Core i5-13600K?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9575F makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13600K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9575F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 13.7% more average FPS across 33 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 24 MB.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9575F is the better fit. You are getting 292.3% better PassMark, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 966.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 24 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 9575F is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13600K makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9575F is 3483.9% more expensive on MSRP at $11,791 MSRP versus $329 MSRP, and it gives you a 13.7% average FPS lead across 33 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13600K is also 813.6% better value on MSRP (114.5 vs 12.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 9575F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2022), 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 24 MB, and more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 14/20. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-13600K Benchmark Check

EPYC 9575F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	281 FPS	303 FPS
medium	264 FPS	280 FPS
high	220 FPS	232 FPS
ultra	188 FPS	196 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	268 FPS
medium	198 FPS	223 FPS
high	158 FPS	172 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	153 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	186 FPS
medium	133 FPS	154 FPS
high	102 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	105 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open EPYC 9575F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	632 FPS	797 FPS
medium	533 FPS	681 FPS
high	450 FPS	536 FPS
ultra	416 FPS	466 FPS
1440p
low	540 FPS	657 FPS
medium	474 FPS	585 FPS
high	403 FPS	475 FPS
ultra	351 FPS	384 FPS
4K
low	316 FPS	367 FPS
medium	282 FPS	332 FPS
high	269 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	238 FPS	268 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open EPYC 9575F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	663 FPS	884 FPS
medium	543 FPS	721 FPS
high	477 FPS	652 FPS
ultra	414 FPS	553 FPS
1440p
low	600 FPS	689 FPS
medium	499 FPS	560 FPS
high	434 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	417 FPS
4K
low	441 FPS	487 FPS
medium	381 FPS	404 FPS
high	344 FPS	359 FPS
ultra	295 FPS	297 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open EPYC 9575F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	941 FPS	1118 FPS
medium	941 FPS	1007 FPS
high	923 FPS	884 FPS
ultra	831 FPS	797 FPS
1440p
low	941 FPS	884 FPS
medium	850 FPS	778 FPS
high	738 FPS	683 FPS
ultra	651 FPS	595 FPS
4K
low	651 FPS	645 FPS
medium	588 FPS	575 FPS
high	529 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open EPYC 9575F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and EPYC 9575F

Core i5-13600K

The Core i5-13600K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture. It features 14 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 37,655 points. Launch price was $319.

EPYC 9575F

The EPYC 9575F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 147,718 points. Launch price was $11,791.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 9575F offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 9575F has 50 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 5 GHz on the EPYC 9575F — a 2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13600K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9575F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the EPYC 9575F's 147,718 — a 118.7% lead for the EPYC 9575F. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9575F.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
Cores / Threads	14 / 20	64 / 128+357%
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+2%	5 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+6%	3.3 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB	256 MB (total)+967%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)+100%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	4 nm-43%
Architecture	Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	37,655	147,718+292%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	29,308

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13600K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 9575F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-5600 memory speed. The Core i5-13600K supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13600K) vs 12 (EPYC 9575F). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13600K) vs 128 (EPYC 9575F) — the EPYC 9575F offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and SP5 (EPYC 9575F).

Feature	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
Socket	LGA1700	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	6 TB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13600K) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9575F). The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the EPYC 9575F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop, EPYC 9575F targets Data Center / High Frequency. Direct competitor: EPYC 9575F rivals Xeon 6952P.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	EPYC 9575F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 770	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Desktop	Data Center / High Frequency

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the EPYC 9575F debuted at $11791. On MSRP ($329 vs $11791), the Core i5-13600K is $11462 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 12.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9575F — making the Core i5-13600K the 160.5% better value option.